Xi and Putin Stand Up for Humanity at Davos: Closed vs Open System Ideologies Clash Again
Between January 25-29, 2021, world leaders were corralled into a digital conference titled “The Davos Agenda” in order to discuss the foundations of the emerging new world economic architecture which has come to be called “The Great Reset”.
For those who have not yet made this disturbing discovery, the Great Reset agenda was first unveiled by the World Economic Forum as a cover for imposing a new world economic order upon nation states. This reset hides behind a veneer of morality but is actually reveals a to feudalism with a technotronic twist.
“Technotronic” in this sense does not refer to the 1980s band that made “Pump up the Jam” famous but rather Zbigniew Brzezinski’s 1970 ‘Between Two Ages: America in the Technotronic Era’ where the arch globalist famously stated:
“The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities.”
As I outlined in my recent study “Maurice Strong and the Roots of the Great Reset Agenda”, and which Brzezinski’s life’s devotion indicates, while this plan was officially unveiled in June 2020, its origins can be traced back many decades earlier.
The formula driving this “global cure-all” is simple and starts with the following presumptions:
1) COVID-19 has caused world economic systems to grind to a halt. 2) Now the leaders of the world have a golden opportunity to correct the abuses of unbounded free market monetarism which became hegemonic since 1971 and establish a new global economic order. 3) This new order will be premised on a mass behavioral modification of humanity in order to end climate change (by decarbonizing the world to pre-industrial levels) while also creating top-down regimes that can end COVID-19, all in one unified thrust. Whether or not these crises are in fact the existential threats we have been sold or whether they are chimerical non-issues created by computer modellers is a topic to be tackled another day.
Giddy Technocrats Celebrate the Crisis
Speaking at the World Economic Forum (WEF) last year, Prince Charles stated buoyantly “We have a golden opportunity to seize something good from this crisis- its unprecedented shockwaves may well make people more receptive to big visions of change. It is an opportunity we have never had before and may never have again.” (1)
WEF founder and Chairman Klaus Schwab echoed these words saying: “The pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world”.
Even the Vatican itself under Pope Francis has jumped on board endorsing the Great Reset while creating a green “Council for Inclusive Capitalism With the Vatican”.
U.S. Special Envoy for Climate John Kerry stated on January 23: “The notion of a Reset is more important than ever before. I personally believe we’re at the dawn of an extremely exciting time.”
Of course, words like “social justice”, “equality” and “development” are freely bandied about by Davos creatures but when one digs into the means promoted to achieve the mass decarbonization of world civilization, a different picture emerges.
Not only would these “decarbonizing Green New Dealers” tie civilization to low quality, incredibly expensive and woefully unreliable forms of energy rooted in windmills and solar panels, but forcing the swift elimination of fossil fuels (and the conspicuous absence of nuclear power development) would constrict civilization’s ability to sustain its population and agro-industrial needs in stark terms. The greatest hit under this green paradigm would be the poor who, at least for a short period, desperately require vastly increased uses of the fossil fuels located under their soil in order to industrialize.
Additionally, Davos Creatures promoting this de-carbonized world have laid out in depth, a new system of Green hegemonic digital currency controlled by the City of London and the Central Bankers’ Climate Councils. These financiers love the idea of expert panels of managing humanity outside of the “messy institutions of democracies” which have historically blocked the enlightened elite from making the “tough draconian” decisions for the common good since the days of the League of Nations.
What is it about Putin and Xi which inspires such fear in the hearts of the Great Reset Architects? In the simplest terms, the answer is “open system economics”.
Open vs Closed Systems
While the Great Reset Architects are thoroughly committed to closed operating systems which demand computer models be imposed onto the world guiding a zero-growth policy towards total equilibrium and “entropy”, the multipolar alliance led by Xi and Putin are committed to “open system” thinking.
Where the closed system/unipolar model demands the submission of governments to a totalitarian system of controls of “experts” who are uniquely qualified to control the diminishing rates of return of fixed resources, the open system/multipolar model demands a respect for sovereign nations and a focus upon the creation of new resources via scientific and technological progress. Where one is premised on a zero-sum game of win-lose behavior (aka: the survival of the fittest), the other is premised upon a non-zero-sum game of win-win cooperation.
When confronted with resource scarcity and population growth, closed system thinkers adopt a Malthusian view that population growth must be culled to adhere to mathematical models of “carrying capacity” in some imagined stated of “natural equilibrium” which said models demand must exist.
This is the sort of thinking going on behind the eyeballs of World Wildlife Foundation founder Prince Philip of Mountbatten who stated in a 1988 interview with Deutsche Press Agentur:
“The more people there are, the more resources they’ll consume, the more pollution they’ll create, the more fighting they will do. We have no option. If it isn’t controlled voluntarily, it will be controlled involuntarily by an increase in disease, starvation and war. …In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.”
Thomas Malthus and his model of population growth
On the other hand, open system thinkers promote scientific and technological progress and industrial growth in order to overcome said states of “carrying capacity”. This approach reflects an understanding that value is not located in money, or any material phenomenon per se, but rather in the immaterial powers of cognition and metaphysical laws of intention, creativity, morality, hope and justice. Malthusian materialists tend to get very uncomfortable at such “abstract” and “unscientific” ideas.
Where one system promotes the trojan horse seeds of its own annihilation, the other promotes the seeds of fruitful new epochs of continual growth and discoveries both on the surface of the earth and also beyond.
Xi Jinping’s Speech
Speaking on January 25, President Xi called for “four major tasks facing people of our times”: 1) macro economic needs, 2) a foreign policy of peaceful co-existence and win-win cooperation, 3) close the north south inequality gap and 4) coordinate to deal with global challenges.
On the first task, Xi stated: “We need to shift the driving forces and the growth models of the global economy and improve its structure, so as to set the course for long term, sound, and steady development of the world economy.”
Pushing back against the Hobbesian unipolarists presiding over the summit, Xi defended his 2nd Task saying: “Difference in itself is no cause for alarm. What does bring alarm is arrogance, prejudice, and hatred. It is the attempt to impose hierarchy on human civilization, or to force one’s own history, culture, and social system upon others. The right choice is for countries to pursue peaceful coexistence based on mutual respect, and only finding common ground, while shelving differences, and to promote exchanges and mutual learning. This is the way to add impetus to the progress of human civilization.”
Defending poor nations’ rights to control their own developmental pathways, Xi announced the 3rd task saying: “The international community should keep its eyes on the long run, honor its commitment to provide necessary support to developing countries and safeguard their legitimate development interests.”
And finally on the 4th task, Xi stated: “No global problem can be solved by any one country alone. There must be global action, a global response, and global cooperation.”
While Xi supported the WHO, globalization and Paris Climate Accords, his approach to net carbon neutrality by 2060 is hinged not on degrowth, but rather advanced scientific and technological progress, equal access for development, the defense of sovereign nation states as outlined in the UN Charter. On these points Xi stated:
“China will invest more in science and technology, developing and enabling systems for innovation as a priority, turn breakthroughs in science and technology into actual productivity at a faster pace, and enhance intellectual property protection, all for the purpose of fostering innovation-driven, higher-quality growth. Scientific and technological advances should benefit all humanity, rather than be used to curb and contain other countries’ development.”
After paying lip service to Schwab and applauding the extension of the START treaty with the USA, Putin pointed out in his January 27 Davos speech that the overarching dynamic under Biden continues to be degenerative, driving us towards world war with stark parallels to the 1930s. Here Putin warned that experts “compare the current situation to the 1930s… As you are aware, the inability and unwillingness to find substantive solutions to problems like this in the 20th century led to World War 2 catastrophe. Of course, such a heated global conflict is impossible in principle, I hope. That is what I am pinning my hopes on, because this would be the end of humanity. However as I have said, the situation could take an unexpected and uncontrollable turn – unless we do something to prevent this. There is a chance that we will face a formidable break-down in global development, which will be fraught with a war of all against all and attempts to deal with contradictions through the appointment of internal and external enemies and the destruction of not only traditional values such as the family, which we hold dear in Russia, but fundamental freedoms such as the right of choice and privacy.”
Putin amplified Xi’s earlier remarks, laying out three domains for reform starting with 1) economic development for all, 2) the prevention of the takeover of world policy by big tech giants saying “they are de facto competing with states”, and 3) a reform towards win-win international relations.
While Putin’s entire speech should be studied in depth, the spirit of his message was captured in his clearly hopeful but stark warning that: “we have a shared responsibility to prevent this scenario which looks like a grim dystopia, and to ensure instead that our development takes a different trajectory- positive, harmonious and creative.”
The Nature of 21st Century Energy Needs
While China certainly invests quite a lot in green energy grids, it derives the actual industrial energy needed to power its capital-intensive infrastructure megaprojects and high-speed rail grids from its world leading investments into nuclear power and fossil fuels.
China, Russia and India together represent over 50% world nuclear energy projects while the west has all but abandoned the technology long ago.
China currently has 17 reactors under construction and has created the most advanced molten salt fast breeder (4th generation) reactor which is 60x more efficient than other reactors due to its closing of the fuel cycle (allowing its users to reprocess “waste” into new fuel rather than bury it as has been the common practice in the west since Carter sabotaged the closing of the fuel cycle in the 1970s.) As these next generation units featuring molten thorium are increasingly brought online (alongside similar ambitions in India and Russia), while the fuel cycle is finally brought to a close, such fears of meltdowns, radiation, and nuclear waste that poisoned generations of minds will finally be healed.
Additionally, China has become a leader in nuclear fusion development with openly stated aims to mine the moon for Helium 3 (found in abundance in Lunar soil, but nearly totally absent on the Earth due to our magnetic field). When the inevitable fusion breakthroughs arise, experts estimate that about three truck loads of this isotope shipped to the earth from the moon will supply one year of energy needs at current capacities.
At an important Energy summit in 2019, Putin laid out the important role of fusion power as the foundation for a harmonization between the realm of nature (the biosphere) and the realm of creative reason (the technosphere) saying: “super-efficient scientific, engineering and manufacturing solutions will help us establish a balance between the biosphere and the technosphere… fusion energy which in fact is similar to how heat and light are produced in our star, the sun, is an example of such nature-like technologies.”
Having signed several joint agreements on nuclear development and technology sharing over the past decade, China and Russia have become world leaders in nuclear power, not only in their own borders, but internationally as well, providing the technology widely across Asia, Africa, the Middle East and South America as evidenced by the following map.
While earlier efforts to promote this type of policy were once championed by American statesmen during the 1940s-1960s, the deep state coup which emerged over the dead bodies of JFK, MLK and RFK, ensured that no such policy would ever be permitted under the Anglo-American empire.
Both China and Russia have signed an agreement to jointly build a lunar base by 2030 and both have expressed an understanding that space mining, fusion power, and large-scale infrastructure development via the BRI, Polar Silk Road and beyond which have opened vistas of potential for global growth and economic justice which keeps closed system technocrats up at night.
This is the foundation of the “Sustained development” open system paradigm of Eurasia which stands in total contrast to the deconstructionist “sustainable development” closed system paradigm of the west.
Which version of the Great Reset will ultimately come out on top still remains to be seen.
(1) While many don’t pay the impending King of England much respect, the fact is the WEF website itself credits him as the key organizing force behind it stating: “The Great Reset is a new initiative from the WEF and HRH the Prince of Wales to guide decision-makers on the path to a more resilient, sustainable world beyond coronavirus”.
Matthew Ehret is the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review , Senior Fellow at the American University in Moscow, BRI Expert on Tactical talk, and has authored 3 volumes of ‘Untold History of Canada’ book series. In 2019 he co-founded the Montreal-based Rising Tide Foundation.
There have been comments made w.r.t. Xi weeding out fundamentalist military members from the CCP and being interested in reducing tension arising from Geopolitics and Chinese expansion, even including acceptance of Taiwan, but it does feel such a big step from his very recent attitudes and actions or are these just a screen to protect his position within the CCP?
Headly, I think you have to say which economy you are referring to a) the bread and butter and happiness economy or b) the financial private money creation economy. In the London controlled, Prince Charles, feudal hierarchy, the Real economy is closed but the Financial economy is wide open among the players. In the Putin/Li version the Real economy is open to development but the control of money creation and infrastructure is a closed function of government within the Belt and Road area. I don't imagine China will open its capital account except on a government to government basis. In other words, I don't think the two systems can co-exist. Take your pick.